Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in /var/www/bear-hearing.dk/public_html/wp-content/plugins/qtranslate-x/qtranslate_frontend.php on line 497
{"id":1976,"date":"2018-05-15T11:32:46","date_gmt":"2018-05-15T11:32:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bear-hearing.dk\/?page_id=1976"},"modified":"2019-03-29T09:16:43","modified_gmt":"2019-03-29T09:16:43","slug":"mengfan-wu","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/bear-hearing.dk\/da\/whoweare\/mengfan-wu\/","title":{"rendered":"Mengfan Wu \u2013 Hvem vi er"},"content":{"rendered":"

Hvem vi er<\/h3>\t\t\t
Projektet havde deltagelse af en gruppe dedikerede mennesker, der kom fra audiologiske klinikker, universiteter, teknologisk service, og h\u00f8reapparatindustrien. Det var medicinske audiologer og otologer, ingeni\u00f8rer, konsulenter og audiologop\u00e6der. Nogle unge, andre mere erfarne. Nogle arbejdede p\u00e5 projektet p\u00e5 fuld tid, andre p\u00e5 deltid og med andre forpligtelser. Enkelte havde direkte erfaringer med h\u00f8reneds\u00e6ttelse og rehabilitering.<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/div><\/div><\/div>
\n\n
\n\t\"Mengfan\n<\/div>\n\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>
\n
\n\t

Mengfan Wu<\/b><\/a><\/div>\r\nPhD studerende\r\nSyddansk Universitet<\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Mengfan Wu<\/h3>\n
\n\t

Mengfan Wu har to mastergrader fra University College London (MA Linguistics & MRes Speech, Language and Cognition). Da hun studerede sin f\u00f8rste master, fik hun en st\u00e6rk interesse for neuroscience og forskning inden for h\u00f8relse. Titlen p\u00e5 hendes f\u00f8rste master project er \"Cortical Entrainment and N400 to Accented and Competing Speech: a Comparison between L1 and L2 Listeners\". Med en stigende interesse for forskning i h\u00f8retab, udf\u00f8rte hun et psykofysisk projekt for at studere udviklingen af h\u00f8retab og interaktion mellem temporal processring og oplevelsen af tale i st\u00f8j.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Arbejdsomr\u00e5de<\/h3>\n
\n\t

Mengfan Wu bidrager til arbejdet med nye strategier for h\u00f8reprofiler og tilpasning<\/a>, samt valideringen af nye metoder<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Ressourcer<\/h3>\n
\n\t<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>
\n
\n\t

Publikationer<\/h4>\n
<\/a><\/form>\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n
\r\n

2022<\/h3>\r\n <\/td>\r\n <\/tr>

Sanchez-Lopez, Raul; Wu, Mengfan; Fereczkowski, Michal; Santurette, S\u00e9bastien; Baumann, Monika; Kowalewski, Borys; Piechowiak, Tobias; Bisgaard, Nikolai; Ravn, Gert; Narayanan, Sreeram Kaithali; Dau, Torsten; Neher, Tobias<\/p>

Towards Auditory Profile-Based Hearing-Aid Fittings: BEAR Rationale and Clinical Implementation<\/a> Journal Article<\/span> <\/p>

Audiological Research, <\/span>12 <\/span>(5), <\/span>pp. 564-573, <\/span>2022<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@article{AudRes2022a,
\r\ntitle = {Towards Auditory Profile-Based Hearing-Aid Fittings: BEAR Rationale and Clinical Implementation},
\r\nauthor = {Raul Sanchez-Lopez and Mengfan Wu and Michal Fereczkowski and S\u00e9bastien Santurette and Monika Baumann and Borys Kowalewski and Tobias Piechowiak and Nikolai Bisgaard and Gert Ravn and Sreeram Kaithali Narayanan and Torsten Dau and Tobias Neher},
\r\nurl = {https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/audiolres12050055},
\r\ndoi = {10.3390\/audiolres12050055},
\r\nyear = {2022},
\r\ndate = {2022-10-09},
\r\njournal = {Audiological Research},
\r\nvolume = {12},
\r\nnumber = {5},
\r\npages = {564-573},
\r\nabstract = {(1) Background: To improve hearing-aid rehabilitation, the Danish \u2018Better hEAring Rehabilitation\u2019 (BEAR) project recently
\r\ndeveloped methods for individual hearing loss
\r\ncharacterization and hearing-aid fitting. Four auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric hearing loss and supra-threshold hearing abilities were identified. To enable auditory profile-based hearing-aid treatment, a fitting rationale leveraging differences in gain prescription and signal-to- noise (SNR) improvement was developed. This report describes the translation of this rationale to clinical devices supplied by three industrial partners. (2) Methods: Regarding the SNR improvement, advanced feature settings were proposed and verified based on free-field measurements made with an acoustic mannikin fitted with the different hearing aids. Regarding the gain prescription, a clinically feasible fitting tool and procedure based on real-ear gain adjustments were developed. (3) Results: Analyses of the collected real-ear gain and SNR improvement data confirmed the feasibility of the clinical implementation. Differences between the auditory profile-based fitting strategy and a current \u2018best practice\u2019 procedure based on the NAL- NL2 fitting rule were verified and are discussed in terms of limitations and future perspectives. (4) Conclusion: Based on a joint effort from academic and industrial partners, the BEAR fitting rationale was transferred to commercially available hearing aids.},
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {article}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

(1) Background: To improve hearing-aid rehabilitation, the Danish \u2018Better hEAring Rehabilitation\u2019 (BEAR) project recently
\r\ndeveloped methods for individual hearing loss
\r\ncharacterization and hearing-aid fitting. Four auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric hearing loss and supra-threshold hearing abilities were identified. To enable auditory profile-based hearing-aid treatment, a fitting rationale leveraging differences in gain prescription and signal-to- noise (SNR) improvement was developed. This report describes the translation of this rationale to clinical devices supplied by three industrial partners. (2) Methods: Regarding the SNR improvement, advanced feature settings were proposed and verified based on free-field measurements made with an acoustic mannikin fitted with the different hearing aids. Regarding the gain prescription, a clinically feasible fitting tool and procedure based on real-ear gain adjustments were developed. (3) Results: Analyses of the collected real-ear gain and SNR improvement data confirmed the feasibility of the clinical implementation. Differences between the auditory profile-based fitting strategy and a current \u2018best practice\u2019 procedure based on the NAL- NL2 fitting rule were verified and are discussed in terms of limitations and future perspectives. (4) Conclusion: Based on a joint effort from academic and industrial partners, the BEAR fitting rationale was transferred to commercially available hearing aids.<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

Wu, Mengfan; Christiansen, Stine; Fereczkowski, Michal; Neher, Tobias<\/p>

Revisiting Auditory Profiling: Can Cognitive Factors Improve the Prediction of Aided Speech-in-Noise Outcome?<\/a> Journal Article<\/span> <\/p>

Trends in Hearing, <\/span>26 <\/span>, pp. 1-16, <\/span>2022<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@article{Mengfan_congnitive,
\r\ntitle = {Revisiting Auditory Profiling: Can Cognitive Factors Improve the Prediction of Aided Speech-in-Noise Outcome?},
\r\nauthor = {Mengfan Wu and Stine Christiansen and Michal Fereczkowski and Tobias Neher},
\r\ndoi = {10.1177\/23312165221113889},
\r\nyear = {2022},
\r\ndate = {2022-06-21},
\r\njournal = {Trends in Hearing},
\r\nvolume = {26},
\r\npages = {1-16},
\r\nabstract = {Hearing aids (HA) are the most common type of rehabilitation treatment for age-related hearing loss. However, HA users often obtain limited benefit from their devices, particularly in noisy environments, and thus many HA candidates do not use them at all. A possible reason for this could be that current HA fittings are audiogram-based, that is, they neglect supra-threshold factors. In an earlier study, an auditory-profiling method was proposed as a basis for more personalized HA fittings. This method classifies HA users into four profiles that differ in terms of hearing sensitivity and supra-threshold hearing abilities. Previously, HA users belonging to these profiles showed significant differences in terms of speech recognition in noise but not subjective assessments of speech-in-noise (SIN) outcome. Moreover, large individual differences within some profiles were observed. The current study therefore explored if cognitive factors can help explain these differences and improve aided outcome prediction. Thirty-nine older HA users completed sets of auditory and SIN tests as well as two tablet-based cognitive measures (the Corsi block-tapping and trail-making tests). Principal component analyses were applied to extract the dominant sources of variance both within individual tests producing many variables and within the three types of tests. Multiple linear regression analyses performed on the extracted components showed that auditory factors were related to aided speech recognition in noise but not to subjective SIN outcome. Cognitive factors were unrelated to aided SIN outcome. Overall, these findings provide limited support for adding those two cognitive tests to the profiling of HA users.},
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {article}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

Hearing aids (HA) are the most common type of rehabilitation treatment for age-related hearing loss. However, HA users often obtain limited benefit from their devices, particularly in noisy environments, and thus many HA candidates do not use them at all. A possible reason for this could be that current HA fittings are audiogram-based, that is, they neglect supra-threshold factors. In an earlier study, an auditory-profiling method was proposed as a basis for more personalized HA fittings. This method classifies HA users into four profiles that differ in terms of hearing sensitivity and supra-threshold hearing abilities. Previously, HA users belonging to these profiles showed significant differences in terms of speech recognition in noise but not subjective assessments of speech-in-noise (SIN) outcome. Moreover, large individual differences within some profiles were observed. The current study therefore explored if cognitive factors can help explain these differences and improve aided outcome prediction. Thirty-nine older HA users completed sets of auditory and SIN tests as well as two tablet-based cognitive measures (the Corsi block-tapping and trail-making tests). Principal component analyses were applied to extract the dominant sources of variance both within individual tests producing many variables and within the three types of tests. Multiple linear regression analyses performed on the extracted components showed that auditory factors were related to aided speech recognition in noise but not to subjective SIN outcome. Cognitive factors were unrelated to aided SIN outcome. Overall, these findings provide limited support for adding those two cognitive tests to the profiling of HA users.<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

\r\n

2021<\/h3>\r\n <\/td>\r\n <\/tr>

Sanchez-Lopez, Raul; Nielsen, Silje Grini; El-Haj-Ali, Mouhamad; Bianchi, Federica; Fereczkowski, Michal; Ca\u00f1ete, Oscar M; Wu, Mengfan; Neher, Tobias; Dau, Torsten; Santurette, S\u00e9bastien<\/p>

Auditory Tests for Characterizing Hearing Deficits in Listeners With Various Hearing Abilities: The BEAR Test Battery<\/a> Journal Article<\/span> <\/p>

Frontiers in Neuroscience, <\/span>15 <\/span>(724007), <\/span>pp. 1-19, <\/span>2021<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@article{Frontiers_sept_2021,
\r\ntitle = {Auditory Tests for Characterizing Hearing Deficits in Listeners With Various Hearing Abilities: The BEAR Test Battery},
\r\nauthor = {Raul Sanchez-Lopez and Silje Grini Nielsen and Mouhamad El-Haj-Ali and Federica Bianchi and Michal Fereczkowski and Oscar M Ca\u00f1ete and Mengfan Wu and Tobias Neher and Torsten Dau and S\u00e9bastien Santurette},
\r\nurl = {https:\/\/www.frontiersin.org\/articles\/10.3389\/fnins.2021.724007\/full},
\r\ndoi = {10.3389\/fnins.2021.724007},
\r\nyear = {2021},
\r\ndate = {2021-09-29},
\r\njournal = {Frontiers in Neuroscience},
\r\nvolume = {15},
\r\nnumber = {724007},
\r\npages = {1-19},
\r\nabstract = {The Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project aims to provide a new clinical profiling tool\u2014a test battery\u2014for hearing loss characterization. Although the loss of sensitivity can be efficiently measured using pure-tone audiometry, the assessment of supra-threshold hearing deficits remains a challenge. In contrast to the classical \u201cattenuation-distortion\u201d model, the proposed BEAR approach is based on the hypothesis that the hearing abilities of a given listener can be characterized along two dimensions, reflecting independent types of perceptual deficits (distortions). A data-driven approach provided evidence for the existence of different auditory profiles with different degrees of distortions. Ten tests were included in a test battery, based on their clinical feasibility, time efficiency, and related evidence from the literature. The tests were divided into six categories: audibility, speech perception, binaural processing abilities, loudness perception, spectro-temporal modulation sensitivity, and spectro-temporal resolution. Seventy-five listeners with symmetric, mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss were selected from a clinical population. The analysis of the results showed interrelations among outcomes related to
\r\nhigh-frequency processing and outcome measures related to low-frequency processing abilities. The results showed the ability of the tests to reveal differences among individuals and their potential use in clinical settings. },
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {article}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

The Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project aims to provide a new clinical profiling tool\u2014a test battery\u2014for hearing loss characterization. Although the loss of sensitivity can be efficiently measured using pure-tone audiometry, the assessment of supra-threshold hearing deficits remains a challenge. In contrast to the classical \u201cattenuation-distortion\u201d model, the proposed BEAR approach is based on the hypothesis that the hearing abilities of a given listener can be characterized along two dimensions, reflecting independent types of perceptual deficits (distortions). A data-driven approach provided evidence for the existence of different auditory profiles with different degrees of distortions. Ten tests were included in a test battery, based on their clinical feasibility, time efficiency, and related evidence from the literature. The tests were divided into six categories: audibility, speech perception, binaural processing abilities, loudness perception, spectro-temporal modulation sensitivity, and spectro-temporal resolution. Seventy-five listeners with symmetric, mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss were selected from a clinical population. The analysis of the results showed interrelations among outcomes related to
\r\nhigh-frequency processing and outcome measures related to low-frequency processing abilities. The results showed the ability of the tests to reveal differences among individuals and their potential use in clinical settings. <\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

Wu, Mengfan; Ca\u00f1ete, Oscar M; Schmidt, Jesper Hvass; Fereczkowski, Michal; Neher, Tobias<\/p>

Influence of Three Auditory Profiles on Aided Speech Perception in Different Noise Scenarios<\/a> Journal Article<\/span> <\/p>

Trends in Hearing, <\/span>25 <\/span>, pp. 1\u201315, <\/span>2021<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@article{doi:10.1177\/23312165211023709,
\r\ntitle = {Influence of Three Auditory Profiles on Aided Speech Perception in Different Noise Scenarios},
\r\nauthor = {Mengfan Wu and Oscar M Ca\u00f1ete and Jesper Hvass Schmidt and Michal Fereczkowski and Tobias Neher},
\r\nurl = {https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/23312165211023709},
\r\ndoi = {10.1177\/23312165211023709},
\r\nyear = {2021},
\r\ndate = {2021-06-29},
\r\njournal = {Trends in Hearing},
\r\nvolume = {25},
\r\npages = {1--15},
\r\nabstract = {Hearing aid (HA) users differ greatly in their speech-in-noise (SIN) outcomes. This could be because the degree to which current HA fittings can address individual listening needs differs across users and listening situations. In two earlier studies, an auditory test battery and a data-driven method were developed for classifying HA candidates into four distinct auditory profiles differing in audiometric hearing loss and suprathreshold hearing abilities. This study explored aided SIN outcome for three of these profiles in different noise scenarios. Thirty-one older habitual HA users and six young normal-hearing listeners participated. Two SIN tasks were administered: a speech recognition task and a \u201cjust follow conversation\u201d task requiring the participants to self-adjust the target-speech level. Three noise conditions were tested: stationary speech-shaped noise, speech-shaped babble noise, and speech-shaped babble noise with competing dialogues. Each HA user was fitted with three HAs from different manufacturers using their recommended procedures. Real-ear measurements were performed to document the final gain settings. The results showed that HA users with mild hearing deficits performed better than HA users with pronounced hearing deficits on the speech recognition task but not the just follow conversation task. Moreover, participants with pronounced hearing deficits obtained different SIN outcomes with the tested HAs, which appeared to be related to differences in HA gain. Overall, these findings imply that current proprietary fitting strategies are limited in their ability to ensure good SIN outcomes, especially for users with pronounced hearing deficits, for whom the choice of device seems most consequential.},
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {article}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

Hearing aid (HA) users differ greatly in their speech-in-noise (SIN) outcomes. This could be because the degree to which current HA fittings can address individual listening needs differs across users and listening situations. In two earlier studies, an auditory test battery and a data-driven method were developed for classifying HA candidates into four distinct auditory profiles differing in audiometric hearing loss and suprathreshold hearing abilities. This study explored aided SIN outcome for three of these profiles in different noise scenarios. Thirty-one older habitual HA users and six young normal-hearing listeners participated. Two SIN tasks were administered: a speech recognition task and a \u201cjust follow conversation\u201d task requiring the participants to self-adjust the target-speech level. Three noise conditions were tested: stationary speech-shaped noise, speech-shaped babble noise, and speech-shaped babble noise with competing dialogues. Each HA user was fitted with three HAs from different manufacturers using their recommended procedures. Real-ear measurements were performed to document the final gain settings. The results showed that HA users with mild hearing deficits performed better than HA users with pronounced hearing deficits on the speech recognition task but not the just follow conversation task. Moreover, participants with pronounced hearing deficits obtained different SIN outcomes with the tested HAs, which appeared to be related to differences in HA gain. Overall, these findings imply that current proprietary fitting strategies are limited in their ability to ensure good SIN outcomes, especially for users with pronounced hearing deficits, for whom the choice of device seems most consequential.<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

\r\n

2020<\/h3>\r\n <\/td>\r\n <\/tr>

Wu, Mengfan; Sanchez-Lopez, Raul; El-Haj-Ali, Mouhamad; Nielsen, Silje G; Fereczkowski, Michal; Dau, Torsten; Santurette, S\u00e9bastien; Neher, Tobias<\/p>

Investigating the Effects of Four Auditory Profiles on Speech Recognition, Overall Quality, and Noise Annoyance With Simulated Hearing-Aid Processing Strategies<\/a> Journal Article<\/span> <\/p>

Trends in Hearing, <\/span>24 <\/span>, pp. 1-12, <\/span>2020<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@article{doi:10.1177\/2331216520960861,
\r\ntitle = {Investigating the Effects of Four Auditory Profiles on Speech Recognition, Overall Quality, and Noise Annoyance With Simulated Hearing-Aid Processing Strategies},
\r\nauthor = {Mengfan Wu and Raul Sanchez-Lopez and Mouhamad El-Haj-Ali and Silje G Nielsen and Michal Fereczkowski and Torsten Dau and S\u00e9bastien Santurette and Tobias Neher},
\r\nurl = {https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177%2F2331216520960861},
\r\ndoi = {10.1177\/2331216520960861},
\r\nyear = {2020},
\r\ndate = {2020-10-19},
\r\njournal = {Trends in Hearing},
\r\nvolume = {24},
\r\npages = {1-12},
\r\nabstract = {Effective hearing aid (HA) rehabilitation requires personalization of the HA fitting parameters, but in current clinical practice only the gain prescription is typically individualized. To optimize the fitting process, advanced HA settings such as noise reduction and microphone directionality can also be tailored to individual hearing deficits. In two earlier studies, an auditory test battery and a data-driven approach that allow classifying hearing-impaired listeners into four auditory profiles were developed. Because these profiles were found to be characterized by markedly different hearing abilities, it was hypothesized that more tailored HA fittings would lead to better outcomes for such listeners. Here, we explored potential interactions between the four auditory profiles and HA outcome as assessed with three different measures (speech recognition, overall quality, and noise annoyance) and six HA processing strategies with various noise reduction, directionality, and compression settings. Using virtual acoustics, a realistic speech-in-noise environment was simulated. The stimuli were generated using a HA simulator and presented to 49 habitual HA users who had previously been profiled. The four auditory profiles differed clearly in terms of their mean aided speech reception thresholds, thereby implying different needs in terms of signal-to-noise ratio improvement. However, no clear interactions with the tested HA processing strategies were found. Overall, these findings suggest that the auditory profiles can capture some of the individual differences in HA processing needs and that further research is required to identify suitable HA solutions for them. },
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {article}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

Effective hearing aid (HA) rehabilitation requires personalization of the HA fitting parameters, but in current clinical practice only the gain prescription is typically individualized. To optimize the fitting process, advanced HA settings such as noise reduction and microphone directionality can also be tailored to individual hearing deficits. In two earlier studies, an auditory test battery and a data-driven approach that allow classifying hearing-impaired listeners into four auditory profiles were developed. Because these profiles were found to be characterized by markedly different hearing abilities, it was hypothesized that more tailored HA fittings would lead to better outcomes for such listeners. Here, we explored potential interactions between the four auditory profiles and HA outcome as assessed with three different measures (speech recognition, overall quality, and noise annoyance) and six HA processing strategies with various noise reduction, directionality, and compression settings. Using virtual acoustics, a realistic speech-in-noise environment was simulated. The stimuli were generated using a HA simulator and presented to 49 habitual HA users who had previously been profiled. The four auditory profiles differed clearly in terms of their mean aided speech reception thresholds, thereby implying different needs in terms of signal-to-noise ratio improvement. However, no clear interactions with the tested HA processing strategies were found. Overall, these findings suggest that the auditory profiles can capture some of the individual differences in HA processing needs and that further research is required to identify suitable HA solutions for them. <\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

Wu, Mengfan; Lopez, Raul Sanchez; El-Haj-Ali, Mouhamad; Nielsen, Silje Grini; Fereczkowski, Michal; Dau, Torsten; Santurette, S\u00e9bastien; Neher, Tobias<\/p>

Perceptual evaluation of six hearing-aid processing strategies from the perspective of auditory profiling: Insights from the BEAR project<\/a> Inproceedings<\/span> <\/p>

Kressner, Abigail Anne; Regev, Jonathan; Christensen-Dalsgaard, Jakob; Tranebj\u00e6rg, Lisbeth; Santurette, S\u00e9bastien; Dau, Torsten (Ed.): Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, <\/span>pp. 265-272, <\/span>2020<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@inproceedings{ISAAR2019_WU_print,
\r\ntitle = {Perceptual evaluation of six hearing-aid processing strategies from the perspective of auditory profiling: Insights from the BEAR project},
\r\nauthor = {Mengfan Wu and Raul Sanchez Lopez and Mouhamad El-Haj-Ali and Silje Grini Nielsen and Michal Fereczkowski and Torsten Dau and S\u00e9bastien Santurette and Tobias Neher},
\r\neditor = {Abigail Anne Kressner and Jonathan Regev and Jakob Christensen-Dalsgaard and Lisbeth Tranebj\u00e6rg and S\u00e9bastien Santurette and Torsten Dau },
\r\nurl = {https:\/\/proceedings.isaar.eu\/index.php\/isaarproc\/article\/view\/2019-30},
\r\nyear = {2020},
\r\ndate = {2020-04-08},
\r\nbooktitle = {Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research},
\r\nvolume = {7},
\r\npages = {265-272},
\r\nabstract = {The current study forms part of the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project, which aims at developing new clinical tools for characterizing individual hearing loss and for assessing hearing-aid (HA) benefit. Its purpose was to investigate potential interactions between four auditory profiles and three measures of HA outcome obtained for six HA processing strategies. Measurements were carried out in a realistic noise environment at signal-to-noise ratios that were set based on individual aided speech reception thresholds (SRT50). Speech recognition scores and ratings of overall quality and noise annoyance were collected in two spatial conditions. The stimuli were generated with the help of a HA simulator and presented via headphones to 60 older, habitual HA users who had previously been profiled based on a data-driven approach (Sanchez-Lopez et al., 2019). The four auditory profiles differed significantly in terms of mean aided SRT50 and interacted significantly with the HA processing strategies for speech recognition in one spatial condition. Moreover, the correlation-pattern between the speech recognition scores and subjective ratings differed among the auditory profiles.},
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {inproceedings}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

\r\n

2019<\/h3>\r\n <\/td>\r\n <\/tr>

Sanchez-Lopez, Raul; Nielsen, Silje; Ca\u00f1ete, Oscar; Fereczkowski, Michal; Wu, Mengfan; Neher, Tobias; Dau, Torsten; Santurette, Sebasti\u00e9n<\/p>

A Clinical Test Battery for Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR). Towards the prediction of individual auditory deficits and hearing-aid benefit<\/a> Inproceedings<\/span> <\/p>

Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress on Acoustics (ICA 2019), Aachen, Germany, Sept 9-13 2019., <\/span>pp. 3841-3848, <\/span>International Commission of Acoustics <\/span>2019<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@inproceedings{ica2019rsl,
\r\ntitle = {A Clinical Test Battery for Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR). Towards the prediction of individual auditory deficits and hearing-aid benefit},
\r\nauthor = {Raul Sanchez-Lopez and Silje Nielsen and Oscar Ca\u00f1ete and Michal Fereczkowski and Mengfan Wu and Tobias Neher and Torsten Dau and Sebasti\u00e9n Santurette},
\r\nurl = {http:\/\/pub.dega-akustik.de\/ICA2019\/data\/articles\/000470.pdf},
\r\nyear = {2019},
\r\ndate = {2019-09-11},
\r\nbooktitle = {Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress on Acoustics (ICA 2019), Aachen, Germany, Sept 9-13 2019.},
\r\npages = {3841-3848},
\r\norganization = {International Commission of Acoustics},
\r\nabstract = {One aim of the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project is to define a new clinical profiling tool, a test-battery, for individualized hearing loss characterization. Recently, Sanchez-Lopez et al. (ISAAR 2019) proposed a test battery for hearing deficit characterization. The proposed tests were divided into six categories: audibility, middle-ear analysis, speech perception, binaural-processing abilities, loudness perception, and spectro-temporal resolution. The results of 54 listeners were analyzed using a data-driven approach (Sanchez-Lopez et al., 2018), which provided evidence for the existence of two independent sources of distortion and four different auditory profiles. The classification of the listeners into auditory profiles allows the prediction of the performance of the listeners on different psychoacoustic tasks as well as their expected performance while wearing hearing aids. For the classification, a decision tree with only the most predictive tests is desirable for a correct classification of the listeners. The present study aims to explore the optimal decision tree and to propose a reduced, reliable and time-efficient test battery that can classify listeners into the four auditory profiles in a clinical environment. The clinical test battery will be used in a large-scale study that will help implement a protocol for better hearing rehabilitation.},
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {inproceedings}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

One aim of the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project is to define a new clinical profiling tool, a test-battery, for individualized hearing loss characterization. Recently, Sanchez-Lopez et al. (ISAAR 2019) proposed a test battery for hearing deficit characterization. The proposed tests were divided into six categories: audibility, middle-ear analysis, speech perception, binaural-processing abilities, loudness perception, and spectro-temporal resolution. The results of 54 listeners were analyzed using a data-driven approach (Sanchez-Lopez et al., 2018), which provided evidence for the existence of two independent sources of distortion and four different auditory profiles. The classification of the listeners into auditory profiles allows the prediction of the performance of the listeners on different psychoacoustic tasks as well as their expected performance while wearing hearing aids. For the classification, a decision tree with only the most predictive tests is desirable for a correct classification of the listeners. The present study aims to explore the optimal decision tree and to propose a reduced, reliable and time-efficient test battery that can classify listeners into the four auditory profiles in a clinical environment. The clinical test battery will be used in a large-scale study that will help implement a protocol for better hearing rehabilitation.<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

Wu, Mengfan; Sanchez-Lopez, Raul; El-Haj-Ali, Mouhamad; Nielsen, Silje; Fereczkowski, Michal; Dau, Torsten; Santurette, Sebasti\u00e9n; Neher, Tobias<\/p>

Assessing the interaction between different auditory profiles and benefit from six hearing aid processing strategies: Insights from the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project<\/a> Inproceedings<\/span> <\/p>

Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress on Acoustics (ICA 2019), Aachen, Germany, Sept 9-13 2019., <\/span>pp. 3849-3856, <\/span>2019<\/span>.<\/p>

Abstract<\/a><\/span> | Links<\/a><\/span> | BibTeX<\/a><\/span><\/p>

@inproceedings{ica2019mw,
\r\ntitle = {Assessing the interaction between different auditory profiles and benefit from six hearing aid processing strategies: Insights from the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project},
\r\nauthor = {Mengfan Wu and Raul Sanchez-Lopez and Mouhamad El-Haj-Ali and Silje Nielsen and Michal Fereczkowski and Torsten Dau and Sebasti\u00e9n Santurette and Tobias Neher},
\r\nurl = {http:\/\/pub.dega-akustik.de\/ICA2019\/data\/articles\/000335.pdf},
\r\nyear = {2019},
\r\ndate = {2019-09-11},
\r\nbooktitle = {Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress on Acoustics (ICA 2019), Aachen, Germany, Sept 9-13 2019.},
\r\npages = {3849-3856},
\r\nabstract = {The current study forms part of the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project, which aims at developing and evaluating new clinical tools for individual hearing loss characterization and hearing aid benefit assessment. The purpose of the current study was to assess the interaction between four different auditory profiles and two outcome measures of aided performance obtained for six selected hearing-aid processing strategies (Sanchez-Lopez et al., Euronoise 2018). Sixty older habitual hearing-aid users who participated in the study were previously classified into four auditory profiles based on a data-driven approach (Sanchez-Lopez et al., Trends in Hearing 2018). All stimuli were generated with the help of a hearing aid simulator and presented via headphones. Speech recognition in noise was assessed at fixed signal-to-noise ratios based on individual 50%-correct speech reception thresholds measured in a realistic noise environment. Subjective ratings of overall quality and noise annoyance were measured using a multiple stimulus comparison paradigm. It is hypothesized that the four auditory profiles will have different needs in terms of compensation so perceptual outcomes for the six hearing aid processing strategies are expected to be different.},
\r\nkeywords = {},
\r\npubstate = {published},
\r\ntppubtype = {inproceedings}
\r\n}
\r\n<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>

The current study forms part of the Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project, which aims at developing and evaluating new clinical tools for individual hearing loss characterization and hearing aid benefit assessment. The purpose of the current study was to assess the interaction between four different auditory profiles and two outcome measures of aided performance obtained for six selected hearing-aid processing strategies (Sanchez-Lopez et al., Euronoise 2018). Sixty older habitual hearing-aid users who participated in the study were previously classified into four auditory profiles based on a data-driven approach (Sanchez-Lopez et al., Trends in Hearing 2018). All stimuli were generated with the help of a hearing aid simulator and presented via headphones. Speech recognition in noise was assessed at fixed signal-to-noise ratios based on individual 50%-correct speech reception thresholds measured in a realistic noise environment. Subjective ratings of overall quality and noise annoyance were measured using a multiple stimulus comparison paradigm. It is hypothesized that the four auditory profiles will have different needs in terms of compensation so perceptual outcomes for the six hearing aid processing strategies are expected to be different.<\/div>

Close<\/a><\/p><\/div>